By
I agree with the Dems that U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should be fired, but not for the same reasons.
Resident Detroit Free Press Islamist propaganda writer Niraj Warikoo reports that Gonzales will be meeting tomorrow with FBI Award Revokee and “former” Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine Terrorist , tomorrow.

Digusting:
Terrorist Imad Hamad Gets an Audience w/ Atty Gen Gonzales
(Hamadafat by Six Meat Buffet/Preston Taylor Holmes)
As , Hamad was engaged in a sham marriage and should have been deported, but the Clintonistas gave up under pressure from U.S. Senator Carl Levin and other similar malefactors. And Hamad praised as “patriotic,” the infamous Palestinian Authority TV “Children’s Club” broadcast, which urged 3-year-old Palestinian kids to become terrorists and murder Jews. He regularly bitches any time a federal agent does his/her job. And right after 9/11, he convinced then-U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Collins to warn Muslim men before FBI interviews, by asking them to show up. Predictably less than a third did. In 2003, the after I exposed the hushed award–and him–in the .
Is this the guy the Attorney General of the United States of America should be meeting with . . . or putting behind bars?
The Democrats are right. Gonzalez MUST GO!
Just one question: When Gonzalez bends over forward tomorrow, will he be able to touch his toes?
(FYI, the meeting is taking place in the office of Hamad buddy, U.S. Attorney –a Bush Federal Court of Appeals judicial nominee. A number of other extremist Muslims (redudant) of Hamad’s ilk will also attend the pander/bitchfest.)

By
We’ll likely never really know if the explosion today in the garage of the Luxor Hotel and Casino was an act of Islamic terrorism. Why won’t we know?
Well, Vegas Mayor (and Mafia lawyer) Oscar Goodman has repeatedly denied the very valid story of how members of the Detroit Terror Cell had cased Vegas. In fact, Vegas was one of the American sites that the four Detroit Al-Qaeda terrorists planned to blow up, and reportedly had scenes of Vegas in their “tourism” videos. They considered Vegas, “the City of Satan.”
That’s why in 2004, around New Year’s Eve and until the end of January, the Homeland Security color alert level was raised to Orange and several other security precautions were taken in and around Vegas airports. The Detroit FBI office took the threats seriously, as did the Vegas FBI office.

Luxor Explosion: Federal Prosecutor Rick Convertino Warned of Danger
But they were under pressure from Mayor Goodman to deny the whole thing. That’s because Mayor Goodman didn’t want to see tourism and gambling in Vegas decreased–and he was more concerned about that than the safety of countless American tourists to his city.
The whole story played out in the Detroit papers, with Goodman denying it was a serious threat–because he got caught with his pants down trying to cover it up and jeopardize American lives–and differing FBI and local law enforcement offices arguing whether it was. My friend, , the prosecutor of the Detroit Terror cell disclosed this information to Associated Press. Convertino went out of his way to urge law enforcement officials in Detroit and Vegas to take the terrorist threat to Los Vegas seriously:

When the Justice Department (search) obtained two videos suggesting terrorists had cased Las Vegas casinos, the discussions didn’t center on public alerts or heightened security. Rather, authorities worried about the effects on tourism and the casinos’ legal liabilities, internal memos show.
One of the tapes, found in Spain in 2002, shows Al Qaeda’s European operatives casing Las Vegas casinos in 1997, engaging in casual conversation that included an apparent reference to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (search), the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.
The other tape found in a Detroit terror cell’s apartment had eerily similar footage of the MGM Grand, Excalibur and New York, New York casinos ‚Äî three hotels within a short distance of each other on the Las Vegas strip with a combined total of 11,000 rooms.
Though the FBI offered, most local law enforcement and casino security officers declined an invitation to view the footage after it was obtained in 2002, according to the memos and one of the prosecutors in the Detroit case.
One document obtained by The Associated Press quotes a federal prosecutor in Las Vegas as saying the city’s mayor [DS: Oscar Goodman] was concerned about the “deleterious effect on the Las Vegas tourism industry” if the evidence became public. The mayor said Monday he was never told of the footage.
Another memo states the casinos didn’t want to see the footage for fear it would make them more likely to be held liable in civil court if an attack occurred.
“The information, unfortunately, was not taken as seriously as we believed it to have been,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Convertino told AP in an interview, recounting how only two local police officers accepted the FBI agent’s offer to see the tape.
“The reason that he (the FBI agent) was given for the low turnout was because of liability, that if they heard this information they would have to act on it. It was extraordinarily unacceptable and absolutely outrageous,” Convertino said.
The prosecutor said he later asked a Las Vegas police officer who had seen the tape and flown to Detroit to help why more wasn’t done. “This officer told me that the amount of money that travels through Las Vegas on a daily, weekly and monthly basis ‚Äî if something doesn’t go boom, nothing is going to be done,” he said. . . .
Knowledge of the tapes reached the highest levels of Justice. The department’s terrorism chief, Barry Sabin, referenced the casino footage in a memo to the FBI.
In late summer 2002, FBI agents discovered the casino footage when they belatedly decoded a European surveillance tape found a year earlier in the Detroit terror cell’s apartment. A few weeks later, a Justice expert provided prosecutors similar surveillance that Spanish authorities had recovered from an Al Qaeda cell in Madrid.
When FBI supervisory agent Paul George flew to Las Vegas to show the Detroit tape, “the FBI, casino representatives, Clark County Sheriff’s Department and the JTTF (joint terrorism task force) declined to attend,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Keith Corbett wrote.
“No one showed up except for two Metro officers,” Corbett added. “Indeed, the casinos informed Agent George that they did not want to show up because of concerns about liability.”
In a series of e-mails, Convertino pleaded with Assistant U.S. Attorney Sharon Lever in Las Vegas to take the video footage seriously, even though local officials were cool to it. He noted two experts had concluded the tape matched other Al Qaeda surveillance.
“While I understand your previously stated concerns that the mayor of Las Vegas, the local sheriff and others believe our indictment may temporarily have a deleterious effect on the Las Vegas tourism industry, it is unconscionable that any reasonable person would assert that anyone here possessed a cavalier attitude toward the tape,” Convertino wrote.
Prosecutors were allowed in spring 2003 to show the Detroit tape to jurors, but were kept by their superiors from introducing the Spanish tape.
Both tapes showed the three same hotels. The Excalibur, in fact, “was both shot inside and out, daytime and nighttime,” according to one Justice document.
The Detroit tape had struck Justice’s terror experts because it switched back and forth from scenes of Las Vegas to pre-Sept. 11 scenes of New York that included the World Trade Center and a hotel across from the twin towers.
A Justice expert wrote that both tapes followed the Al Qaeda training manual because “surveillance is inserted into seemingly innocent tourist videos” to disguise it.
A cooperating prosecution witness in Detroit told authorities that one member of the alleged terror cell described Las Vegas as the “City of Satan” and boasted “the brothers are going to destroy it.”
Documents provided to U.S. authorities from Spain say the tape found in Madrid was taken by an Al Qaeda operative in August 1997 and later sent via courier to Al Qaeda’s leaders in Afghanistan.

For his concern for American lives and prosecuting these terrorists, now . And the terrorists are mostly free. Welcome to America’s “War on Terror.”
So, in this case, when they tell you, today, that what happened at the Luxor was not terrorism, can you really believe them?
If you do, I’ve got some land underneath the Luxor to sell you. What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas . . . and remains a secret if Mayor Goodman has anything to do with it.

By
has an interesting article about all of the lawsuits employers face for requiring English-only (though the article is written by , so keep that in mind).
According to the piece, employers can only legally adopt an English-only speaking rule if they can show it’s a business necessity. HUH?! What about how it’s a necessity because we’re here in America and that’s the language we’re supposed to speak?
Whines Ronna Timpa, owner of Workplace ESL Solutions (who would go out of business if all job candidates knew they needed to speak English to get a job):

Imagine how you would feel if you couldn’t speak your own language in the bathroom.

I’d feel just fine. I speak fluent Hebrew, but I find no necessity–at any time, unless I’m in Israel–to speak it in the bathroom. Is there something I’m not aware of about toilets, #1, and #2 that requires a foreign language?
Timpa is also upset with employers who prevent co-workers from speaking in their “native” language during lunch. Uh, if they’re here other than as tourists, they’re supposed to be natives of THIS country. And therefore, their “native” language should be English.
It’s just plain bad for morale for the workplace to become the Tower of Babel. It’s amazing to me that the burden is on any employer in the United States of America to prove that it’s a business necessity to require English only.
Then, there is the problem of the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC), which is funded by your taxes. It’s spending your tax money–that was meant to prevent workplace discrimination against, say, Blacks or Jews–to prosecute employers who ban foreign languages.
Ridiculous.
Also alarming are the figures from the 2000 Census (which have probably increased exponentially) of the percentages of people in some states who don’t speak English. Here are the states with the highest percentage of residents ages 5 and older that speak English less than “very well”:

California–20.2%
Texas–14.8%
New York–12.7%
Nevada–12.1%
Arizona–11.8%

So one in five Californians can’t speak English, and more than one in ten in at least four other states. That’s incredible. Incredibly unacceptable. .

By
I used to remark that the Democrats have Woody Allen Family Values. Unfortunately, I can no longer say that because the Republicans are now sullied with Bruce Willis Family Values.
Yes, the GOP (and some truly misguided conservatives) have embraced Bruce Willis because he openly proclaims he’s a Republican. And because they’re so desperate for star power, they’ll take whatever mangy mutt comes along. It’s not just his public making-out with girls who could be his granddaughters. And it’s not just his photos and discussion in the latest issue (June 2007) of Vanity Fair of the bizarre threesome vacations he takes with ex-wife Demi Moore and her toddler husband, Ashton Kutcher. For those who ask about polygamy for women, this is it.
It’s far too many other things. For starters, his new “Live Free or Die Hard” movie–the 4th installment of a movie series that long ago was dead (and should have stayed that way) has the same old post 9/11 Hollywood message on Islamic terrorists: There aren’t any.

Bruce Willis: Die Hard, Woody Allen Style
Instead Timothy Olyphant plays “Greg,” the non-Muslim leader of the non-Muslim Internet-based terrorist organization which is systematically shutting down the United States. Willis produced the film, and–it goes without saying–he’s the star on which the Die Hard series depends. So, he could have insisted on a plot that actually resembles reality in which internet-based terrorists are what they are in real life: Muslims. But he didn’t care to do that. So we shouldn’t care about him or his movies.
And finally, there’s Willis’ lack of discretion in the way he talks and what he says. Here’s Willis’ comments on live national television during a New Jersey Nets broadcast on April 29th. First, the interviewer calls him “Bruce Wilson,” but then it degrades when he utters the MF-bomb.

As , Willis recently starred in the box office bomb “Perfect Stranger,” which includes (remember that when the hypocritical Willis produces Michael Yon’s “Deuce Four” movie celebrating the soldiers fighting in Iraq) and attacks on conservative Republican officeholders as resembling scandalized former Congressman Mark Foley.
Sorry, but I’m just not enamored with the GOP’s street version of Woody Allen. Republicans need to stop their obsessive quest for celebs. And leave that to the professionals . . . the Democrats.

By
Kwame “the Kingpin” Kilpatrick, Detroit’s Pimp Daddy Mayor, and B. Hussein Obama are feuding. And it centers on the corrupt, sleazy Mayor’s diamond stud earring (and sadly not on the rest of his whole Gangsta persona).
Kwame the Kingpin–who loves to race-bait and did so to win re-election against his bi-racial opponent, Freeman Hendrix–thinks that B. Hussein Obama is too White. Today, Obama is speaking at the Detroit Economic Club–a bunch of liberal, rich old geezers who think they’re Republicans and don’t matter much–and called Kwame the Kingpin to touch base. Here’s the rest of the story, from today’s Detroit Free Press:

Obama: Black Enough , But Not Earring-Clad Pimp-Daddy Mayor

Word is it went like this: In advance of his speech today to a sold-out Detroit Economic Club, Obama calls Kilpatrick to touch base, ask for his support, get to know him a little.
Kilpatrick, not yet committed to any presidential candidate, challenges the senator with a pinch of bluster about the nature of Obama’s broad, cross-racial campaign. He asks Obama whether he’d be comfortable standing in public next to a 6-foot-4 black guy from Detroit.
Obama, no shrinking violet, then fires back, saying he thinks he could handle it just fine — as long as Kilpatrick loses the earring.

Hmmm . . . How come Obama didn’t ask rapper Ludacris to “lose the earring” (when he hung out with him)? And the crude lyrics?
But, wait, there’s even more to the story. B. Hussein Obama is now backtracking from the earring request and groveling, because requesting the removal of the earring is yet another sign of “Not Black Enough”:

Obama’s people say he knows the mayor has accomplished much in the city, and that Kilpatrick lost the ear stud long ago; the senator meant no harm, they say.

Uh, actually, that’s not true. Kwame Kilpatrick only “loses the earring” when he’s running for office. He’s got it back now.
Yup, that’s the kind of Prez he’d be–a sucking-up panderer with absolutely zero backbone.
His actions–more than his words–are telling us all about B. Hussein Obama. Pay attention.
***
FYI, the author, Stephen Henderson, claims that his column about this is not about whether Obama is Black enough. But then, he proceeds in code language to question whether Obama is Black enough. He questions why Obama is talking about energy independence and the economy, instead of urban issues (because those issues clearly are not important to America?):

It’s natural for big-city mayors such as Kilpatrick to wonder whether the senator might be avoiding too much talk about urban issues for fear that it will alienate supporters who are excited by his message of unity and hope.
Let’s face it: When you start talking about the deep poverty that afflicts urban areas and the solutions — regarding health care, education and job creation — that they cry out for, some folks get uncomfortable. That’s even truer when race, still an aggravator for all of those ills, enters the picture. . . .
It’s about whether he can be a candidate whose broad base visibly and forcefully showcases urban leaders, their constituents, and their issues.
I’m sure that’s the point Mayor Kilpatrick was making during the phone call — even if he was a little boorish about it. He has said similar things publicly, including on a recent NAACP panel where Kilpatrick noted that candidates John Edwards and Sen. Hillary Clinton are so far the only Democrats who’ve talked much about an urban agenda. He said nothing about Obama.
Obama, for his part, could have begun to put a lot of this to rest today in Detroit — the perfect setting to deliver a fiery speech about urban issues and his vision for America’s cities.
Instead, Obama plans to talk about energy independence and its effect on the economy in this region, with a hook into the auto industry’s recent troubles. Not a bad topic, and certainly relevant to his audience.
Still, it’s a lost opportunity that Obama will need to reclaim before he’s the clear choice of urban voters.

“Urban voters” equals Black voters. Translation: Obama’s “not Black enough.”

Kwame Kilpatrick:
Detroit’s Pimp-Daddy Mayor is Arbiter of Obama’s “Blackness”

By
Welcome to the NEW and Dis-improved Department of Homeland Security, where extremist Muslims are highly coveted commodities, but experienced Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents are NOT.
This ad for a “DHS Career Expo”–taking place tomorrow–appeared in Washington, DC-area newspapers, last week. Thanks to the gazillion rightfully angry ICE agents who sent it to me. The first thing I noticed is who they’re looking for as agents: extremely religious Muslims women. And then, there is the fact that ICE is no longer considered “Law Enforcement,” according to this ad.

Thanks to David Lunde for Technical Assistance w/Posting This Ad
Let’s start with the ultra-PC pic of the hijab-encrusted woman. The message is, “Attention Wolves: Henhouse seeking new residents.” Where are the pics of men and women wearing Crosses and Jewish Stars? We can’t have that. It might offend someone. It’s a good thing DHS wasn’t around in the 1940s or that hijab-encrusted woman would be replaced by a guy wearing a swastika and engaged in a certain salute. And to think this event is being held in the Reagan Building. Ronald Reagan is turning over in his grave.
ICE not listed as “Law Enforcement”? Apparently, “Travel Security & Immigration” are no longer law enforcement functions. HUH?!
That’s news to the ICE agents we pay to engage in law enforcement and carry a gun and a badge. Some excerpts of some of their e-mails are below.
No wonder ICE ranks 222 out of of 230 federal agencies (in a survey of the best places to work in the government) and the highest atrition rate–by far–in Homeland Security. And, as I wrote before, ICE will soon likely . I’d say these are more than hints that is a giant, whopping failure. Her agency isn’t even considered “law enforcement” anymore by DHS. Its agents hate her and are leaving in droves. And she’s losing a good part of her agency’s most important functions. She can write her epitaph with that.
Here’s what “her” agents think–and most of them are not Muslims . . . for now:

I was apparently mistaken that ICE was a law enforcement agency. I have been corrected – it is a transportation security and immigration agency. If I want a law enforcement career with DHS, I need to go to the Secret Service, CBP or ‘FLETC’. No wonder morale at ICE is horrible and that ICE ranked at the very bottom of 230 other federal agencies as far as workplace satisfaction (in a recent survey). This is, of course, thanks to our wonderful leader [The ICE Princesss] – who couldn’t care less about placing the right people in the right positions within ICE.
Thanks,
an ICE employee

***

Debbie,
It seems if I want a law enforcement job within DHS, I need to work for CBP, Secret Service, or FLETC. Apparently ICE fits in the “Travel Security and Immigration” section, right below TSA. I’m not that smart, but I thought all the criminal investigations I was doing involving dope, kiddie porn, and money laundering were law enforcement. Perhaps I was wrong. Or perhaps this is a frightening portent of things to come. It seems your was right on the mark.
Keep up the good work. The grunts on the ground really appreciate having somone in a position of influence express our viewpoints and understand our frustrations. It would be nice if our own brass did.
A Dedicated ICE Agent

***

Notice the ultra politically correct picture banner. It seems that Anglos are not encouraged to apply. In a war on global terrorism, with radical Muslims being the major aggressors, why does DHS seem to be really trying hard to encourage Muslims to apply (well, maybe just female Muslims)?

***

Debbie,
Seems like the Department doesn’t even recognize us as Law Enforcment any more! This is a recruiting ad for a DHS Job Fair in Washington DC.
The ad outraged about 90% of our workforce to include DRO. By the afternoon we recived the same ad posted to our intranet website. It had been corrected and we were listed 3rd under Law Enforcement.
No apologies, in any fashion. Was like it never happened as far as our management. They even had the nerve to post the corrected version as if it was the new version with no explainations. Also, to add insult to injury we were listed 3rd. ICE in the Homeland Security Act was established as the investigative arm of DHS somewhat like FBI is the investigative arm of DOJ. Also, we have the largest investigative force of all DHS agencies and the broadest authorities as stated and they list us 3rd…Still goes to show you how important the agency is to main DHS. Then the public wonders what’s wrong and that’s why high caliber investigators are leaving in droves for other agencies! A widely known fact is that we currently have the highest attrition rate of any federal agency and nobody including congress cares!
There is no effort whatsover to improve our situation because bottom line is that nobody in upper management or DHS cares. All they care about is they’re salary and bonuses!

***
Since it seems DHS agrees with me that it really is the Department of Homeland Sharia or the Department of Jihadist Security, as I’ve been saying, here’s my new DHS icon, which I’ll be using from now on (though maybe we’ll put Chertoff’s face under the hijab). Thanks, DHS, for doing the free artwork:

The New Homeland Security: We Seek Muslims & Unqualified Incompetents
(Julie Myers Diet Coke by David Lunde/Lundesigns)

By
This week is chock full of debuts, several of which I’ve already reviewed at length, today. (There are three chick-flicks: “Spiderman 3,” “Lucky You,” and “Waitress.” Here’s the rundown:
* “”: 3rd installment of the Marvel Studios series is overstuffed movie with too many plots, characters, and villains. The crybaby superhero has grown tired.
* “”: Absurd message of this equally absurd movie: If you observe and report suspicious behavior on the part of strange Muslims that appears to be terror-connected, ignore it. Otherwise, you are a bigoted, mean, insane loser. A poor rip-off of “Arlington Road.” .

* “Lucky You“: Although the chick-flick romance part of this Vegas-based movie is cheesy, the poker-playing part is interesting. It helped me–a complete poker ignoramus–to understand more about poker. But for the poker ignorami like me, a little more explanation of the game might have helped (like what the knocking on the table means).
“” star–and I don’t think we can forgive him for starring in that horrid anti-Israel/pan-terrorist silver screen lie–Eric Bana plays a skilled poker-playing hustler who meets Drew Barrymore, a songstress at a restaurant, and uses her for the last bit of money she has, in a desperate attempt to qualify for and afford the entry fee into the World Series of Poker. He soon falls for her and realizes she brings him luck. But his biggest demons are his risky poker-playing style and his estranged world champion poker-player father (Robert Duvall).
Will he make it into the giant poker tournament? How will he do? This is the most poker-centric film I can remember recently, even more so than last year’s “Casino Royale.” If you like poker, you’ll probably like this. Charming, entertaining, light–if a bit sappy.

* “Waitress“: This chick-flick, which debuts this week in New York and Los Angeles (and the rest of the country, in the coming weeks), is getting a lot of buzz. It is the brainchild of the late , the actress who was . She wrote, directed, produced, and co-stars in it.
While it is charming and interesting, it is overall an anti-male movie, in which all men are creeps, cheaters, mean, incompetent, crotchety, or multiples of those. Consider it the hickish version of “Beaches,” and if you are a guy, skip it.
Keri Russell plays a Southern wife and waitress, who discovers she is pregnant by Earl, the controlling, scumbag husband she hates. She bakes fantastic, unusual gourmet pies with funny names relating to her hatred of her husband and the life she is stuck in. The pie diner in which she works is sort of like a 2007 version of “Alice” (the ’70s and ’80s TV sitcom about “Mel’s Diner”), but its biggest seller is her wonderful pies that are out of this world.
She begins an affair with her gynecologist, a nervous doctor from Connecticut, who is married. But all through the affair, she realizes that though he gives her the love and attention she needs, she desperately needs to get out of her loveless, trapping marriage. It’s hard to be convinced that this seemingly smart, independent woman would marry such a creep to begin with.
It’s a little more cheery than my description, but not much more. “Desperate Housewives” is better. Strangley, Keri Russell goes in and out of her Southern accent throughout the movie, making her less believable in the character. Best part of this movie is Andy Griffith, who co-stars as the wealthy man who owns the Pie Diner.

* “Away From Her“: This one is also open in New York and Los Angeles, today, with roll-out release nationwide in the next few weeks. There’s no way around it–this movie is extremely depressing and then some. If you know someone who is afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease, it is more so.
A retired college professor’s wife (Julie Christie) begins to experience the disease, and she convinces him to commit her to a nursing home, despite his objections. He (Gordon Pinsent) loves her and feels he will lose her forever. And that’s what happens. She falls in love with another Alzheimer’s-stricken man (Aubrey) at the home and forgets who he is. And that’s the happy part of the movie. It goes down hill from there. Also co-stars Olympia Dukakis.
It was very obviously made in Canada. I could have done without the gratuitous comment against the War in Iraq (“Don’t they remember Vietnam?”), which had absolutely nothing to do with the plot.
Whoever thought movies were a fun, escapist adventure from humdrum life had nothing to do with making this sad, depressing onscreen tale. Still if your relative is slowly dying of the disease, you may enjoy that you may not have it as bad as the characters in this movie. Excellent acting and very convincing . . . unfortunately.
* “The Invisible“: This thriller debuted last week, but was not screened for critics. I paid to see it on my own, this past week, and I somewhat enjoyed it. I’m surprised they didn’t let critics take a jab at it ahead of time.
A wealthy, smart high school senior in Seattle is murdered by his drug-dealing, crime-spree-engaging female classmate, after he is falsely accused of snitching on her to police. But is he really murdered? It turns out, he isn’t dead yet, but dying. He is invisible to his classmates, friends, and all who are investigating his disappearance and looking for his body. Without her seeing or hearing him, he must convince his hoodlum would-be-killerette to tell police where his body is, as he will soon die.
This movie is far more engaging than my description. It is thrilling and engaging. But it is also violent and bloody and not for kids. Perhaps late teens may be able to see it, but I’d advise against that and recommend it for adults only, despite the PG-13 rating, which I think is quite liberal given the nature of this film. No big stars in this. Biggest name is Marcia Gay Harden, in a co-starring role as the dying boy’s mother.

By
If you see a Muslim immigrant engaged in suspicious behavior, you should (pick one):

a) report it to the FBI and be on the lookout for other behavior by this individual and his associates;
b) cash in your portfolio, fly to Vegas on Hooters Air, and bet on the likelihood of the next terrorist attack;
c) terrorists? Who cares about terrorists? Time to watch the game tonight,and then it’s time for beers and a meeting with my bookie; or

“Civic Duty” is a Bad Rip-off of “Arlington Road”

d) head to your local Christian-Jewish-Muslim interfaith vegan lesbian women’s basketball and dialogue club, so you can all focus on our common love of fattoush. Why focus on our differences when we all have in common things like going to the bathroom and blowing our noses?

If you answered anything but a), then “Civic Duty“–which comes out in limited release in New York and Los Angeles, today–is not meant for you, as you are already doing the right thing to make this a better world. (It will be released in the rest of the country in the next two weeks.) If you answered a), then “Civic Duty” is there to tell you what a crazy, bigoted loser and Nazi you are for daring to think such a thing.
While Civic Duty is new to theaters, in fact the same movie was already released in 8 years ago. It’s called “Arlington Road.” The 1999 film is well done, while Civic Duty isn’t. The former is riveting and thrilling, while the latter is boring and slow, moving in stops and starts. And one other key difference:
In Arlington Road, the main character who suspects his neighbors are terrorists is portrayed sympathetically, and he is 100% right. In Civic Duty, the main character who suspects his neighbor is a terrorist is a jerk, and he seems to be 100% wrong.
So, why the different portrayals? Well, it could have a lot to do with the identity of the suspected terrorists. In “Arlington Road,” they are good Christians and right-wing terrorists. In “Civic Duty,” neighbor Gabe Hassan (played by Khaled Abol Naga) is an Arab Muslim. And how dare we suspect our Arab Muslim neighbors of terrorism . . . even if all the signs are there.
Other than that, the plots are almost identical and the similarities eerie. Both main characters suspect their neighbors are terrorists, both have homely blonde love interests who doubt them and get all bitchy about it, and both involve contact with doubting FBI agents who warn them to stay away.
I watched “Arlington Road,” again, last night to refresh my memory and compare how Hollywood celebrates every kook who sees right-wing militia conpiracies everywhere, but denounces those who worry about the very real threat of Islamic terrorists in our midst.
The tagline of “Arlington Road”–appearing on the DVD cover–is: “Your Paranoia is Real.” The message on its movie posters is “Fear They Neighbor.” The message of “Civic Duty” is: “Your Suspicions About Strange Muslim Neighbors with Chemical Labs in Their Kitchens are Absurd.”
Then, there are the characters. Civic Duty’s Peter Krause plays an obnoxious accountant who is rude and paranoid. Not likeable at all. He’s a loser who can’t hold on to a job and is even mean to cheerful bank tellers. From the opening scene, we see him screaming at the bank employee because she dares to call an ATM an “ATM Machine.” After all, since the M stands for Machine, no-one but complete morons would call it an ATM Machine, and they deserve to be severely verbally abused for daring to utter that redundant term. Yes, this is the jerk who is suspicious about his new Arab Muslim neighbor.
Contrast that with Arlington Road’s protagonist, Jeff Bridges. He plays a sympathetic, gentle professor, whose adoring FBI agent wife was killed at a Ruby Ridge style fiasco. He’s struggling to move on and convince his young son he loves him. And he’s an expert on right-wing terrorist groups. So he knows what he’s talking about.
And the contrasts continue on throughout both movies. The key difference: While in Arlington Road, Bridges turns out to be 100% accurate that his neighbors are part of an extensive right-wing cell (which includes his students) that plots to blow up the J. Edgar Hoover Building (and frames him for it), Civic Duty’s accountant, Peter Krause, is mostly shown to be a crazed, violent nutcase, who suspects terrorist operations based on mistaken assumptions without much evidence of anything, but for his prejudice.
**** SPOILER ALERT ****
Yes, there is a teeny-tiny, possible confirmation at the end of the movie that the Muslim neighbor was, indeed, a terrorist. But it’s ambiguous. Krause breaks into his Muslim neighbor’s apartment. He follows him and searches his trash. He sees Hassan engaged in suspicious behavior, such as taking and keeping piles of empty ATM envelopes from various banks around town. And he sees that Hassan’s kitchen has been transformed into an extensive lab. Hassan explains it away, saying he is a chemistry grad student studying how to further purify tap water by extracting Prussic acid from it.
At the end of the film, Krause with his Arab neighbor hostage, ends up in a police stand-off. The FBI tells him that his neighbor has been checked and cleared. Krause accidentally shoots and kills his wife, and he is in a mental hospital. We hear a newscast in which it is announced that a new terrorist attack has taken place in which people are poisoned from licking ATM envelopes laced Cyanide from Prussic Acid.
So, was the neighbor a terrorist? We arent’ really told. And “Civic Duty” wants to you to wonder. The makers of this film want you to doubt yourself when you think about reporting Muslims behaving suspiciously. It’s not that they are terrorist, it’s that you are nuts. That’s quite the opposite of Arlington Road’s message.
Aside from the boredom inspired by Civic Duty, it’s not believable. It doesn’t help much when a movie set in the U.S. features mostly actors with Canadian accents (it was shot in Canada). And the use of President Bush’s speeches is excessive. We get it–Bush is inspiring paranoia and violence against Muslims, says this film. Plus, the movie is outdated. It’s supposed to take place just after 9/11. The whole flick seems like old news annoyingly attempting irrelevant didactics.
If there’s one thing I think the movie did get right, it’s the incompetence of the FBI’s counterterrorism efforts. While Krause’s character suspects the wrong kind of terrorist plot, he’s right that there was one. But, instead, the demeaning FBI agent (Richard Schiff) misses it all and attacks him for his zealotry.
But the only zealotry in connection with this film should be your zealous avoidance of wasting your ten bucks on it at the theater.
Instead of “Civic Duty,” its producers would have been better advised to remake “Arlington Road” with Muslim terrorists in place of Tim Robbins’ and Joan Cusack’s right-wing Christian ones.

By
So, here’s the strange math of “Spiderman 3“:

* 0 (zero) mystery;
* 1 Chick-flick (yes, that’s what this movie is);
* 1 absurd dancing number–mm-hmm, Peter Parker/Spidey dances in a nightclub (that’s the jump-the-shark moment);
* 2 hours, 20 minutes long (almost an hour longer than it should have been;
* 2 gratuitous cameos–Stan Lee and Bruce Campbell doing a bad French impression and even worse “Pecker” joke (haha, funny);
* 2 love interests;

Spiderman 3: The Battle Within

* 2 crybabies (Spidey and his chick, competing for the smudged eyeliner award):
* 2 superheroes (1-2 of them a villain-turned-hero if you count Spidey against himself);
* 3-4 villains–again, depending on whether you count Spiderman vs. himself;
* 4-5 scenes of girlie-man Spidey/Peter Parker in;
* 6 plotlines (or more–I lost count);
* Countless egomaniacs (lost count here, too); and
* More Computer Generated Imaging (CGI) than you can shake a stick at.

Yup, all of that bloat stuffed into one movie. It’s too much. It’s like a stuffed pizza with way too many ingredients, far too many toppings, stuffed AND flavored crust. And together, it’s a mess. You can barely eat a whole slice, and your stomach is churning with sickness after you’re done consuming.
That’s Spiderman 3 in a nutshell.
And here’s another nutshell: Spiderman 3 IS A CHICK-FLICK!
And the chick ain’t Mary Jane (well, she’s one of them). THE CHICK IS SPIDERMAN/PETER PARKER, played by nerdy actor, Tobey Maguire (who is definitely in touch–way too much in touch–with his feminine side). We see Peter Parker and Spidey cry, whine, and display overwrought melodramatics so much in this movie, I was imagining the tampon and Chicos ads to pop up during a Lifetime Channel commercial break. As I wrote earlier, Spidey cried so much, I had to get a running tally on my Spidey-Cry-O-Meter.
And it’s dark. Spiderman takes on a self-centered, ego-maniacal, bad guy persona and has a battle within, ergo, this movie’s tagline: “The Battle Within.” but that’s nothing new. We saw the same storyline with “Superman III,” in which Supe becomes a dark, conceited alcoholic, on whom the populus has turned. In that movie and this one, their love interests–in that one, Lois Lane; this one, Mary Jane–have discovered their true identities. There’s no mystery left (Mary Jane discovered Parker is Spidey in “Spiderman 2”). It’s simply not sexy, anymore.
And with the end to mystery in the superhero/mortal chick relationship comes dullness . . . and jealousy. Mary Jane is upset that Spiderman is getting so much media attention and accolades. She wants to be a star. (This perpetually whiny, sullen state makes the forever dull, unglamorous Kirsten Dunst seem even less appropriate as a superheroes’ love interest than ever.) And Spidey is all caught up in the parades and newspaper glory:
* Spiderman tells a woman he saved to lift up his mask and kiss him on the lips for the media:

Kiss me. They’ll [the media and the general population] love this.

* Spidey tells Mary Jane:

I’ve become something of an icon. Like yesterday, they were yelling: “Spiderman, Spiderman.”

* He tells villain, the Sandman:

I guess you haven’t heard–Im the sheriff in these here parts.

* He swings around New York just to get accolades, a parade, and a key to the city.
Sorry, but this ain’t your father’s modest superhero out for valor and not glory, nor is it your father’s superhero love interest anymore either. Gone is the supportive woman who swoons over her man’s heroics. Now, she’s just a whiny crybaby–whining about Spidey overshadowing her failed career, whining that he spends too much time saving people and not hanging with her, whining that other women (including a blonde Bryce Dallas Howard) adore him.
Well, this is certainly in tune with the Gen-Y audience at whom this movie is targeted. As I’ve written, recent studies show it’s the most narcissistic and self-centered generation ever. Natch, it’s superheroes reflect that not-so-super quality, I suppose. This movie screams: Me! Me! Me!
Then, there are the villains. We see Peter Parker’s old friend-turned-nemesis, Harry Osborne, played by the hot Jewish actor, James Franco. He takes on his dead father’s evil persona, the Green Goblin, in the form of the New Goblin (so creative, these Marvel Studios guys). He adds some pizazz and movie-star looks to this mostly-bland movie.
But the most interesting villain is the Sandman, played by Thomas Haden Church. How and why he becomes Sandman, the way it is tied back to the first Spidey film, and his dynamic with his estranged family is interesting and adds another dimension. The computer-generated images of him, not so much.
Then, there is the rival freelance photographer Topher Grace. He becomes Venom, who comes toward the end of the movie and adds little it.
And finally, there is Black Spiderman versus Red/Blue Spiderman. A living, black gooey substance shoots to earth from a meteor and ultimately attaches itself to Spiderman’s uniform. It turns Black, and suddenly we see a mean, egomaniacal Spidey (though just as egomaniacal as the Red/Blue Spidey in this installment of Spiderman). He wears black eyeliner. He dances around town and goes shopping for expensive clothes. He does an absurd dance routine at a nightclub.
The editor of The Daily Bugle kinda resembles the real New York Times editors of today. He tells his photographers to get photos of Spiderman doing wrong and wants to bring him down:

Catch his hand in the cookie jar!

But even with that realism, the movie is simply too chock-filled. It’s all too much and overloads the movie to such an excess.
In his cameo, Hillary-supporter Stan Lee–playing a man on the street–remarks about Spiderman to Peter Parker:

I guess one person can change the world.

Maybe so. But it took a whole lot of people to change Spiderman into a dud.

By
Chances are that if you’re reading this, you’re NOT a supporter of Hillary Clinton. In my view, her candidacy is proof that you can, indeed, serve as President for more than two terms in America.
Today’s Wall Street Journal has an amusing piece on the MySpace Friends list of Hillary a/k/a Hillary Rodham Cankle’s (or just, “Hillary Cankles,” since she just announced she’s dropping the “Rodham” for like the gazillionth opportunistic time). The story is actually about all of the candidates, but Hillary has the most interesting “Friends” on her MySpace page:

Until a few weeks ago, one of Hillary Clinton’s friends was LaMott Jackson, a 35-year-old who says he’s searching for “a smart, insanely funny & beautiful woman in touch with her ‘dirty’ side” [DS: Is that Hillary?] and is a big fan of an HBO television series called “Pornucopia.”

<

At least, that was according to Sen. Clinton’s MySpace page, which for weeks pictured Mr. Jackson among the top 16 of her 52,187 “friends.” . . .
LaMott Jackson’s photo on Ms. Clinton’s page showed him as a smiling young man. A visit to his page shows that he likes stand-up comedy and photography — but his page is also sprinkled with expletives and anatomical references. “I don’t censor myself, and I do use dirty language,” says Mr. Jackson, who says he was flattered and puzzled by his placement on the page.
Mr. Jackson works in New York as a technical consultant and says he once installed some hardware in Ms. Clinton’s New York office. “I really wanted to meet her and get her to sign her book,” he says.
Mr. Jackson doubts that Ms. Clinton made the decision herself to highlight him on her MySpace page but thinks someone working on her campaign might have appreciated the techno music he has playing on his page.
Another friend Ms. Clinton highlighted for some time is “Audra,” a 24-year-old woman in Portland who has a link on her MySpace page to a quiz entitled “What Song Should You Strip To?” Her choice: Def Leppard’s “Pour Some Sugar on Me.”
Mr. Jackson noticed two weeks ago that he had been pulled from Ms. Clinton’s page. But he remains steadfast in his support. “I wish Hillary luck,” he says.
Ms. Clinton’s campaign has decided to randomly rotate her “top friends” every week, says Isaac Baker, a campaign spokesman. He declined to comment on Ms. Clinton’s individual MySpace friends.

Gee, I wonder why? And people want this woman to be Prez?

Candidates also have had to make some careful decisions about one of MySpace’s most popular features: a place for users to showcase their “top friends” by exhibiting their photographs and providing links to those friends’ MySpace pages. Teenagers fuss over the friends feature, giving precedence to those who will make them look cool. Politicians do that, too. Of the thousands of people who have befriended candidates on MySpace by clicking a button, just a few earn a spot in the prime “top friends” display on the candidates’ pages.

The Republicans (other than the GOP Kucinich, Ron Paul) are far more prudent about who is on their pages, the Democrats . . . well:

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards rewards friends who post pictures of themselves with him.

Figures. The Breck Girl’s egomania never takes a vacation.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney boasts a lineup of five handsome Romney children among his friends.

His kids are his “Friends”? I guess that’s better than Hillary’s “Pornucopia” dude. By going on his page, I learned that one of his son’s names is “Tagg.” “Mitt,” “Tagg”–what, no Bob or Hank or Bud or Mad Dog? (FYI, Mitt is really Milton. But, perhaps, he feels no-one will vote for a “Milton.”)

One candidate doesn’t need to worry about public scrutiny of his MySpace page. Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani’s MySpace page is set to “private” so no one can see it except those who are registered as his friends. . . .
Republican Congressman Ron Paul from Texas highlights Jennifer Bothell, a 31-year-old manager trainee at a Subway sandwich store in Apollo, Pa. On her MySpace page, Ms. Bothell describes herself as a hippie and lists the late Grateful Dead singer Jerry Garcia as her hero. . . . Regarding Rep. Paul, she says: “Obviously, I don’t agree with him on every topic, but I agree with him on a lot of issues,” like his stance against the war in Iraq and his opposition to raising taxes.

Of note on Hillary’s “Friends” list: Where is Bill Clinton?
My own MySpace page is very spartan. That’s because I’m not into it, and I recently joined only to keep my page from being poached by an imposter, a lesson I learned–oddly enough–from Rosie O’Donnell (even a broken clock . . .). I only have one friend–the one you get when you join. But feel free to request to be my “Friend.”
If you are into “Pornucopia” or the best songs to which to strip, though, never mind.